Ousting Metro CEO cheaper than thought

Rumors have been swirling for weeks on the fate of Metro CEO Frank Wilson, ever since Mayor Annise Parker said she wanted him gone.

The latest buzz is that Wilson is more likely to resign than be fired. Metro officials have said privately that they’re working to resolve the situation amicably, and a resolution could come as early as Friday. No doubt, they want to avoid another bruising public spectacle and protracted legal fight. Wilson would probably prefer showing himself the door rather than being kicked to the curb.

Taxpayers probably will still be on the hook for compensating Wilson for his early departure. But, in any case, the tab won’t be nearly as much as Parker’s Metro transition committee initially calculated.

The transition committee’s figure, $1.6 million, has been cited in Chronicle stories and in my column, among other places, as the amount it would take to buy out Wilson’s contract if he were fired for reasons other than “for cause.”

The substantial amount has also been mentioned as one of the obstacles to replacing Wilson, who has come under fire for a barrage of problems facing Metro, from questions over funding of rail projects to a criminal investigation into allegations of document destruction. (A consultant’s report recently cleared Wilson on allegations of improper spending involving his chief of staff.)

But the real amount promised by Wilson’s contract is nearly half the committee’s estimate: about $741,000, according to my own reading of the contract and estimates by Metro Chief Financial Officer Louise Richman.

In the event Wilson is terminated “for reasons other than cause,” the contract awards him two years salary, totaling $614,680.

It also boosts his annual supplemental retirement payment $10,000 from the current amount of $30,000 to $40,000. Assuming Wilson lives another 20 years — which may be generous, considering the beating he has taken lately — Richman estimates Metro’s ultimate payout at $126,271, valued in today’s dollars.

It’s still unclear to me how the transition committee derived at the $1.6 million, but part of the problem is that the figure included a bunch of benefits Wilson gets anyway, even if he stays through the end of his contract in 2012.

Asked about the discrepancy, both new Metro Board Chairman Gilbert Garcia and his co-chair on the transition team, former City Controller George Greanias, acknowledged their figure was flawed.

Greanias blamed an “inartfully worded” PowerPoint presentation to the media and others that described the number as the amount it would take to buy out the contract. Really, he said, the figure was calculated to represent all the “rich” benefits Wilson received in the contract.

“I’ll concede the word was incorrect,” Greanias said of the PowerPoint description, “as long as we can agree the contract was unduly lucrative.”

Yes, on that we agree. After all, how many places will agree to pay you two years salary for getting fired? (That was rhetorical. I’m sure Metro’s not the first agency to agree to such a deal.)

The same contract that lavished Wilson with generous pension and retirement benefits, a $1,030 monthly car allowance and Houston Club membership also promises up to $50,000 to move Wilson and his family from Houston to his next gig anywhere in the United States.

But I digress.

So, it would be cheaper to oust Wilson than we thought.

If Wilson agrees to leave quietly, his contract doesn’t entitle him to any additional benefits. But Metro officials will likely have to offer him some kind of deal in order to convince him to resign in the first place.

4 Responses

But the real amount promised by Wilson’s contract is nearly half the committee’s estimate: about $741,000, according to my own reading of the contract and estimates by Metro Chief Financial Officer Louise Richman.

————————–

When they can’t fund rail lines that’s a big deal. Rumors are now afloat now that the east side line will be halted.